The New York Times today joins the White House, the disingenuous Rightwing media and blogs, and even several unnamed supposed non-Rightwingers in purposely misconstruing Sen. Barbara Boxer's question to Condi Rice at last Thursday's Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Bush's new policy to escalate troop commitment in Iraq.

I reported on the controversy over the phony Boxer/Rice brouhaha yesterday here, after originally calling on a Congress member to ask the very question that Boxer asked (and which the Times ignored) last Sunday and again after Bush's speech on Wednesday night in the face of his supporting, yet callous, comments on the new policy that "we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties."

If the way in which the Times twisted the facts of the event was unintentional, the only alternative then is that the reporters who covered it, Helene Cooper and Thom Shanker, and the editors who allowed the article to go through, are utterly incapable of even the simplest intelligent analysis of a critical and relevant news event and, frankly, shouldn't be working for a paper as still-important to this country as the New York Times.

Picking up on the phony controversy over the prelude to Boxer's question of whether the White House had "an estimate of the number of casualties we expect from this surge?" --- the stunning answer from the Secretary of State, if she's to be believed, is that no, they did not --- the Times joined Fox "News" and NYPost and the other wingnut outlets in both twisting Boxer's comments and forwarding the unsupported notion that there was some sort of personal slur built into them.

The Times quotes Boxer's "offending" phrase --- one that even Rice admits not being offended at, until after the White House Press Secretary, Tony Snow, suggested the comments were "outrageous" later on --- as follows:

During the Thursday hearing, Ms. Boxer told Ms. Rice: "You’re not going to pay any particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family."

Wow! The height of personal rudeness! Boxer really smacked down Rice for not being married and having no children! A comment which several suddenly-"feminist" Rightwing outlets characterized as "One Great Leap (Backwards) for Womankind!" just after Snow coincidentally called it a "great leap backward for feminism" in his official response.

Problem is, the way the Times characterized the "controversy" in the graf reposted above leaves out the rest of Boxer's comment and thus takes it completely out of context. Here's what she actually said in the lead-up to her important all-but-ignored question and response from Rice:

BOXER: Who pays the price? I'm not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old and my grandchild is too young. You're not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family. So who pays the price? The American military and their families. And I just want to bring us back to that fact.

Even Rice admitted in her comments to the Times that "It didn't actually dawn on me that she was saying, 'you don’t have children who can go to war'."

At least until Tony Snow took the opportunity to brilliantly turn the focus away from both Rice's answer revealing that the White House hadn't bothered to measure the cost in increased deaths to U.S. troops before announcing their new policy ("Senator, I don't think that any of us, uh, have a number. That, of expected casualties.") and from the fact that both Republicans and Democrats alike on the Senate committee were highly critical of the White House escalation plan for the Iraq War.

Snow's comments, of course, were the marching orders to the various Rightwing outlets who were all too happy to twist Boxer's comments in the very same way. They all "reported" the exchange in the same phony context the following day (as I previously described here.)

While attacking the messenger to completely distract from the message is a time-honored and well-expected tactic from this White House and their sycophantic supporters, it continues to be distressing to see the once-great "Paper of Record" irresponsibly pick up that ball and run in the same disingenuous direction. Who needs Judith Miller?

To make matters worse, not only did the Times manage to only quote the mangled "analysis" of "Conservative" blogs and commentators in their coverage of the exchange, they even misrepresented a group which, at the first blush of the Times description of them, would seem indicate that they would have been an ally of Boxer's.

Appearing to defect from support of the Democratic Senator is a group called Project 21. The Times characterized the statement of a member of the group this way...

"I am deeply appalled by Senator Barbara Boxer’s cruel and callous attack on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice," said Deneen Borelli, a fellow with an organization called Project 21, which describes itself as a "leading voice in the African-American community."

Oh, man! Boxer's in trouble now! Even the usually Democratic-leaning African-American community has turned their back on her and is attacking her scurrilous personal slur directed at Rice!

But wait. The group which the Times says "describes itself as a 'leading voice in the African-American community' actually describes itself --- on every single page on their website! --- as "The National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives."

Their homepage, featuring a photo of Utah's Republican Senator Orrin Hatch warmingly embracing an unnamed African-American man, reports that their members have been interviewed by one Rightwing media outlet after another, including The O'Reilly Factor, Hannity and Colmes, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Reagan, Sean Hannity, G. Gordon Liddy, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Times.

Great job, New York Times! Rupert Murdoch couldn't have slimed Boxer better himself! And, in fact, he didn't! While we expect that kind of insidious tactic from Murdoch and friends, apparently we should have learned long ago to expect no better from you.

Pathetic.

Finally, in the Times' penultimate graf, they refer to "some Democratic Senate staffers" who "complained privately that Ms. Boxer’s exchange with Ms. Rice allowed the Bush administration to turn the tables on Iraq critics and sidestep the larger issue of the almost uniform opposition to the president’s new plan to send an additional 21,500 U.S. soldiers to Iraq."

Of course, the Times didn't bother to give a single name for any such "Democratic Senate staffers" and given their tortured reporting and misrepresentations in the rest of the article, I'd suggest there is every reason to be dubious that such "privately complaining Democratic Senate staffers" actually exist.

If they do exist, however, then they too are guilty of the same thing that "reporters" Cooper and Shanker and the Times editors are guilty of: Either being cowardly, irresponsible knee-jerk reactionists or, perhaps worse, purposely choosing to keep themselves so uninformed that they become little more than tools for a set of disingenuous Rightwing dead-enders and propagandists who are increasingly desperate enough that they are willing to slime and attack anybody who dares question the indefensible policies of the Bush White House.

And a note to Mr. O'Reilly:
On Friday, you were simply outraged by Boxer's comments and completely ignored (to nobody's surprise) the actual point revealed by the exchange that the White House hasn't bothered --- again, if Rice is to be believed --- to make the appropriate considerations in setting a new policy for the War in Iraq. Since you've tried a great deal, of late, on both radio and television to give the impression that you've been critical of Bush's lack of appropriate planning for the war and the way in which he's carried it out, don't you think that White House's admission that they have not bothered to consider the additional cost in blood to our troops before committing them in this "new way forward" in Iraq ought to be worth pointing out to your many viewers and listeners?

As I was the one --- or, at least the only one that I know of --- to call on a member of the media or Congress to ask the question that Boxer asked, I hope you'll feel free to invite me onto your show to discuss the matter. You may feel as free as you wish to yell indignantly in my direction about the issue, just as you did with whoever those two women were that you had on to supposedly defend Boxer. Just as long as you leave my mic on long enough for me to yell back --- not indignantly, however --- just with the facts of the matter.

Such facts, on the O'Reilly Factor as well as in the New York Times, would be a welcome relief from the regular garbage that both such outlets regularly perpetrate on the American public. It might even succeed in keeping us from making things still worse in Iraq, and even more disturbingly, from running in with eyes wide shut to yet another phony war --- this time in Iran.

My Email address is here, Mr. O'Reilly. I look forward to hearing from you. Even if I have the feeling that I won't.

this is a great opportunity for the neocons to show their mettle . they should be lining up outside rice's home and do their duty. in this way boxer can eat her words when rice performs the ultimate sacrifice for usa and produce some heroes for bush. then everyone will be happy and cheney will get his chance to shoot straight and have fun too

The sycophantic, reigh-wing corporate media whores will change their tune when the Rethugs go down in history as THE most corrupt administration in the history of this country and will take these propaganda-meisters right down with them.

Besides, who in their right mind, still reads newspapers these days? Who in their right mind believes a word placed before them on television news?

Everyone with more than a room temperature IQ gets their news as it breaks on the internet. Damn those internets! They're making the corporate, sycophantic, administration sucking, whoring mainstream media extinct! Yeparoo!

The mechanics of spin are right out in the open this time. Fascinating in a sick kind of way.

Come on, O'Reilly. Take Brad up on his offer. It will be a good show. "On the Bill O'Reilly Factor tonight, Brad Friedman, citizen blogger..." Normally, the only time I subject myself to obnoxious know-nothing blowhards, such as yourself, is when I'm at the local bar. There are always a few loudmouthed drunks hanging around there. Oops...Sorry, Mr. O'Reilly, Brad'll give you a good show. Go for it.

Now...I am truly interested in knowing the casualty estimates for the coming troop escalation. Brad and Sen. Boxer have posed a serious question. As an American citizen, I'd like to know the answer. From Ms. Rice's response to Sen. Boxer's inquiry we must assume 1) that the administration is (astonishingly) embarking on a reckless military escalation without any estimate of what it will cost in American lives or 2) Ms. Rice is lying and the administration doesn't want us to know how many lives are likely to be lost.

Which do you think it is, Mr. O'Reilly? Do you care? Are you really a man of the people?

How these hearing-impaired neo-cons and their Corporate media lapdogs can hear "childless" and "unmarried" in the phrase "no immediate family" is a good question for a psychiatrist. (more likely an army of psychiatrists)

Apparently such "right"-thinking folks believe the phrase "immediate family" only refers to children and spouses, not brothers, sisters, fathers, or mothers.

Maybe only those people who have actual immediate family members serving in Iraq can hear the apparently-too-subtle-for-Republicans difference.

Brad's right: no estimate (if Rice can be believed, which is another sad price we all pay for the neo-cons' addiction to dissembling) means we have yet another consequence of war that they have neglected to plan for. why start now?

Way to go, Republicans. Once again, you have missed the forest for the trees, wallowing in your righteous "outrage" while American military families continue to quietly bear the cost in family blood.

its all a diversion ,like Fox's main story at the moment is the little handicapped girl who's had the operation to keep her from maturing ,hide the big stories from the public behind an endless parade of little stories , very Terri Schiavo-esque .IMHO
mick

aw, come on Mick, everybody in the Corporate Media deserves to take the weekend off from all that exhausting (fake) outrage!

Condi Rice is undoubtedly crying herself to sleep every night, ever since Big Bad Barbie Boxer informed her she doesn't have any immediate family who can be shipped to Iraq. Good thing Tony Snow was there to defend her honor, eh?

Too bad ol' Tony doesn't have the same outrage or sympathy for the families who are crying themselves to sleep every night over a father, mother, brother, sister, son, or daughter lost to the horror of Iraq.

#7 - Too bad ol' Tony doesn't have the same outrage or sympathy for the families who are crying themselves to sleep every night over a father, mother, brother, sister, son, or daughter lost to the horror of Iraq.

Bingo, Des. That's the moral and leadership failure; and it is a relentless, unforgivable failure.

The right, oops, I like the new spelling reigh-wing spinmeisters are so Nazi-like that their words strike fear everytime they spew out more runny puke.

And if anyone tries to correct them with facts, they resort to yelling, and then hanging up - why - because the can't HANDLE the truth!!

Hey O'Rilley, you puke. I double dog dare you to have Brad on your show and actually give him some talk time. It may be hard for you to do, but maybe if you put down the oxycontin for a day or two, your mouth will stop running and your rear end will start.

And Fox, go suck eggs. You haven't published real news since I quit reading Mad Magazine 40 years ago. How can you call yourself legitimate "news" media when you only give clips that omit the CONTEXT of the quote? You guys make me sick, and I just want to puke all over every one of your sorry asses.

This is why I refuse to watch news on CMSM TV channels. If it has commercials, I won't watch their news. I don't read the NYTimes or Washington Post anymore. I strictly watch my TV news on LINK-TV & Free Speech TV...for over a year now. No more corporate news for me, that's it! Things like this just make it sweeter for me, that I switched my viewing habits. Watching Democracy NOW!, the INN Report, and Liberty News is educational as well.

Why isn't ANBCBSNNX CMSM telling us about the corporation "Booz Allen", who is actually the one spying on us? A private corporation is spying on us! Why is Democracy NOW! exposing this, and the CMSM is NOT???

(excerpt)

JUAN GONZALEZ: And I would think that most Americans are worried enough about the fact that the government is eavesdropping on so many of these phone calls, but that it’s also actually being done by private contractors for the government would be even more worrisome to most folks.

TIM SHORROCK: Right. And, you know, I think equally worrisome is the fact that in the last year, when this became a big issue after the New York Times broke the story about the NSA, some Republicans in the Congress tried to introduce legislation to make sure that corporations would not be affected if it was deemed illegal, that they would basically be given a free pass and, you know, not prosecuted. So, you know, I think there’s a real question here about legal liability for these companies if this program is ever deemed illegal.

AMY GOODMAN: To get a sense of how large Booz Allen is, where Mike McConnell comes from, “Information Week,” you write, “reports Booz Allen had more than 1,000 former intelligence officials on its [payroll]” and that it “employs more than 10,000 TS/SCI cleared personnel.” What does that mean?

This is the kind of hard-hitting, important news on Democracy NOW!, every single day! Anyone can watch it instead of ANBCBSNNX. Why aren't you, if you're not?

Did any of you ever hear of "Booz Allen" before I posted this? You can find out things like this every single night, while sitting on your lazyboy, watching TV and eating your dinner...if you want... Every single night, blockbuster news like this with no commercials!

We see in this post by Brad, what is on the corporate TV news channels, do you like it?

How can you search the internet for "Booz Allen", if you've never heard of it? I simply switched watching the corporate 6 o'clock news, to watching Democracy NOW! INSTEAD! While I'm eating dinner. I don't have to search the internet, they're TELLING me this stuff on my TV!

We all complain about ANBCBSNNX, but there exists an alternative.

I'm glad Brad writes these articles about the CMSM, and mediamatters, because I want to know they're still doing this, even though I don't watch it.

That’s Republicans, people! What did you expect? They do this all the time. What Boxer actually said was twisted into something “she basically said” and what “she basically said” is then attacked as if that was what she actually said.

Boxer’s point remains valid: Irrespective of how much pain you feel regarding someone else’s loss, it is NEVER the same as losing one of your own. We have no right to be so cavalier when you put someone else’s life on the line.

It's late. Maybe that's why the words on the Jonathan Bush page seemed to have no meaning to me. They seemed like...just words, vapid words. (I know that wasn't the point.) I'm glad I missed that corporate shit.

I watch Democracy Now! a lot and always get something out of it, but the Booz Allen thing threw me for a loop. Major stuff, and having no specific legal knowledge in the matter, it seems to me it would be illegal anyway. Private corporations spying on Americans? Sad.

Arry: It's the blending of the American government and corporate America = fascmism The GOP has blended govt/corp. It's done. The GOP wants to privatize as much as possible, including the troops, which we know they're doing, too. There's contracted fighters out in Iraq making 5-10x the pay of our soldiers, fighting side-by-side with them. Tell me THAT isn't demoralizing to our troops! Who's against the troops?

Private companies are participating in the wiretapping, too. And the part the CMSM (another corporation(s)) plays in it, is simply not reporting on it...and e-vote machines, and 9/11, privatizing formerly public arenas.

GOP = privatizing the public arena = removing public debate from former public arenas. Get it?

If the GOP succeeded in privatizing social security, you could've kissed it goodbye. Of course, when Bush went on his coast-to-coast "used car salesman" "Ron Poppeil" lying crusade about social security, like when he lied about the Iraq War, he tried his best to tell the best lies about what privatizing social security would be like. The media and his rightwing radio show hosts trumpetted how it would put control of it back in your hands, etc...not telling us how Wall St. would rape and pillage your social security, after it was in the "private" sector. See, the way social security is now, Bush's Wall St. buddies aren't getting a free % of it, and that has got to stop!!! Right?

Oh, and btw??? Whatever happened to the social security crisis? I guess it went away after Bush and the GOP unsuccessfully tried to privatize it?

Question for the CMSM: Did the social security crisis go away? Or did it NOT EXIST in the first place? Oh, Trump is fighting with Rosie anyway, and Boxer made a good comment that they're trying to twist into a bad one...

1. They say, "We have to privatize social security."
2. We have to pimp something in the media to lie to the public, to get them to "buy into" privatizing social security.
3. Let's scare them, into thinking there's a CRISIS with social security, and privatizing SS would fix it.
4. It didn't work, drop it, and the media will not followup that there was no crisis.

The Iraq War:

1. We wanted to attack Iraq as far back as the PNAC.
2. We have to pimp a lie to the public, to get them to "buy into" attacking Iraq.
3. Let's scare them, and fabricate WMD stories and Sadaam/Al Queda ties.
4. It didn't work...let's attack Iran with the same strategy...and so on and so on...

Hey Big Dan
I think the reason they wanted to privatize social security was to get acess to REAL FUNDS to deal with Leo Wanta, instead of the TOTALLY ILLEGAL FUNDS they all have made with their carrosel game of those funds.

TO DARLEEN : Immediate family, those were the words. And Ms. Rice doesn't have a brother, sister, relative in Iraq. So this was truth.

Unless you have fought in a politician's war of lies, I don't think you can understand the price. When a knock on your door tells you the child you had such hopes for is maimed or dead, then you earned the right to send other people's children to war.

Darleen, only one person who has served is for this insane folly, John McCain. But look at the rest who have served Honorably who are saying No MORE !

How can you defend and stand by Bush who lied, and cheated his way out of serving his country?

My child is worth more than the gasoline to fill up Escalades and Expeditions. My child is worth more than a cheap $5.00 ribbon attached to your car. Let my child protect us on OUR borders not for the dirty lies of a politician.

Darleen --- You're not being very logical. It's quite true that Ms. Rice (and Barbara Boxer) will not pay the price with immediate family. So, Sen. Boxer says, So who pays the price? The American military and their families.

Are you saying that's wrong? The American military and their families (families, by the way, often consist of females and males) are not the ones who are paying the price? Sen. Boxer was wrong?

Brad and the rest of the male commentators have nothing to contribute because we don't have uteruses? What utter nonsense.

The hysterical, nonsensical rant on your website --- the one you put in the mouth of Ms. Rice --- says nothing about either Condoleeza Rice or Sen. Boxer, but it says a lot about you.

(BTW, I would say the same to someone without a uterus who wrote such drivel, so let's get that out of the way.)

Brad thank you for taking the (C-Corporate),. CMSM - media and their shills on to this extent. This vile propaganda machine is twisting and bending the truth to enable the rich American/European oil barons and Israeli anit-Arab racists/extreme Right-wing Republican Neo-con warmongers to widen this war to continue the land and oil well grab fest. This naked rape of oil resources and slaughter of lower income individuals (American soldiers and Arab citizens) to further enrich the privileged classes must come to an immediate halt. These money gluttons have a death wish for other peoples children, so the rich can fatten their wallets and bank accounts, from the blood and treasure of the poor. This insanity must stop.

The corporatists will not lift a finger to stop this run away war machine,.. your digits on the keyboard are one of the few voices bringing these issues to the forefront. The warmongers can not be allowed to frame the debate on this Iran/Syria/Iraq - Middle East War on Terrorism - without counter opinions, or we will soon find ourselves in all out conventional and nuclear tipped ballistic missile war explode over the entire mid-Asia/Middle East region.

Well I DO have a uterus..and I also have a son who is almost old enough to register for draft. He deals with recruiters on a daily basis - they start coming to the schools to try and convince the kids how great it is to join the military IN 9TH GRADE!!

My son just found out this past week that a friend of his - a kind, gentle albeit rather naive high school senior who believed the recruiters when they said "Oh you won't be sent to Iraq" - will be going to Iraq in 18 weeks. His friend said he believes he'll be dead very soon after he gets there. He's trying to get his affairs in order before he leaves. He's 18 years old.

I know exactly what Barbara Boxer was saying - having a family member who is putting their life on the line makes it much more real, and makes your stake in the decisions much higher. Nothing she said was untrue, or insulting, and it's pure spin to take a single sentence from her remarks and try to make them into an insult. Ms Boxer knew what she meant, Ms Rice knew what she meant, and for some of you to pretend to be dumb enough to be insulted by her comments is just a childish attempt at manipulation.

Yes, we all know from Kerry and Schumer that only stupid losers with no career paths join the military.

That's why my grandkids' uncle is a Navy medic who has been to Iraq three times, and why my daughter's significant other... college grad ... is at the Naval Air station in Pensacola training on fighter jets.

Brad.. I love ya.. love the site.. But, you'll never win with Bitch O'Liely. You're wasting your time and breath if you go on his show because regardless of what facts you might bring up, he'll just sit there all smug and call you a lunatic or a moron or some other attack to signal to his mindless zombie watchers that they can ignore all the facts you've presented.

Being right, having the facts on your side, making sense and being rational.. none of that matters anymore. People who watch his show (read: garbage wreaking of feces wrapped in a box with a glowing front) are no longer reachable. Anyone that can't see just how fucked up our country is and still supports Shrubby and still watches O'Liely isn't going to hear a word you say. .. Wasted breath..

I can tell right off the bat from Boxer's comment that she's simply saying "neither you nor I have a personal stake in this".. but the media doesn't want to show the truth.. clearly.. right? The reich-wing even went so far on FOX as to say (after the woman curageously pointed out the pertinent question) "no one can give you hard numbers [so why was Boxer even asking.. clearly it was a setup for a slur]". What they fail to mention or discuss is that, while "impossible" to have "accurate or exact hard numbers", you can have a strategic guesstimate, and most RESPONSIBLE military campaigns DO.. which is WHY Boxer was asking. FOX is counting on idiots not having any clue how military planning works when they inflame the conversation with "no one can tell you how many people might die"..

You do a great job, Brad, of explaining what really happened and getting the intent of Boxer out there and show how fucked up the reich-wing is. But you can't win against someone like O'Liely because they are impervious to truth and honesty. All we can do is stand by and mourn when someone is that dead inside but doesn't know enough to lay down and finish the process. O'Liely is a sad thing, not something to try and reason with. You can't reason with a fungus or mold or bacteria, you just have to leave it be until it tries to infect you, then you cure yourself (in this case with a brain) and move on.

This naked rape of oil resources and slaughter of lower income individuals (American soldiers and Arab citizens) to further enrich the privileged classes must come to an immediate halt. These money gluttons have a death wish for other peoples children, so the rich can fatten their wallets and bank accounts, from the blood and treasure of the poor. This insanity must stop.

"You, Brad, don't have a uterus, so (according to Boxer) you have no moral authority to speak on this subject. Maybe you should take this post down, eh?"

See Brad? EXACTLY what I was talking about. _I_ don't have a uterous either.. but I have a CHILD. How can someone be to ignorant as to think this has -anything- to do with giving birth? Oh.. wait.. they watch FOX and listen to Bitch O'Liely.. duh!

Boxer said NOTHING of having a uterus, nor of "giving birth". She SIMPLY said she wasn't going to have to pay a "personal price [of losing a family member]" for the illegal invasion and escalation. Yet, we have Darleen here, too ignorant to stop for 1/2 a second and apply any thought, logic, reason, or sense to all of this. Clearly this idiot didn't even read your post.. if she did, she's a perfect example of what I was telling you in my previous post.. right?

Kes, either she's that dumb, or that vile of a human being.. one or the other.

Even the press has been starting to rumble about how this is about OIL.. so Darleen takes what's known (albeit little known) FACT and tries to pretend it's some "left wing conspiracy". Hell, I just read an article about BearingPoint and it's huge accounting fiasco brewing.. and how THEY had someone working to draft the law divying up the oil fields in Iraq.. a law that's going to be voted on .. this coming week? Where the U.S. oil companies get to build drilling rigs, then pull 75% of all oil profits until those rigs are paid for, then they only get 20% of all profits after that, for ever, only about 100% more than "normally agreed to" in such circumstances.

We have tech to fix our oil addiction, but the oil companies don't want that, right? And Shrubby's family is in oil, making a KILLING off all of this (and despite not one drop of interuption since all this started, oil jumped to record highs on "fears" of interupted flows.. and we have record stock piles with our record prices? maybe you DO have to be a rocket scientist to see what's going on, but I thought it was damn obvious), so none of it's being pushed. We can get on bio-fuels (not corn-alcohol, corn is very hard on the fields and takes a LOT of resources to keep growing over time) like bio-diesel and make a huge shift of production in this country to high performance diesels for cars (20% of all our polution currently comes from 'industrial' diesel like ships and tractor-trailers, etc.. converting them to bio NOW, which is EASY, cuts almost all of that polution out). Yet, it's not even being discussed in Congress (that I've seen).

See, facts like those above are easy to find. If Darleen still thinks hearing about "oil" in context of Iraq is "some left wing conspiracy", then she has no interest in facts and is only interested in being completely partisan and ignorant. Facts are the reich-wing's worst enemy... so they just pretend like they don't exist.. problem sovled (in their tiny little minds, anyway).

Now we've gone way off topic again.. why? Because some reich-wing dipshit came in talking bullshit and making false connections (uterus? wtf? where did that come from??) and distractions (bad checks? Shehan? wtf?) to try and obscure the FACTS. As you pointed out, Kes, that won't fly here. There are too many smart and informed people on Brad Blog for the reich-wing to get away with their drivel. These are the same people that still haven't accepted that there are no WMDs, Saddam had nothing to do with Sept. 11, 2001, nor did he have anything to do with al Qaeda, and there were no terrorists in Iraq before we invaded. These (read: Darleen) are the same idiots that think it's ok to kill innocent people 1/2 way around the world for no good reason, just because their "leaders" say "we should". They are the scurge of humanity, and they make me sad. Truely sad, deep down. They are the destroyers and pain bringers, and the world would be a better place without them.

Troop Surge,.. new plan same as the old plan, guaranteed failure, delay the obvious, then blame somebody else. (Like the Democrats who then have to clean up frat-boy's, monkey shit for brains colossal mess.)

you can't win against someone like O'Liely because they are impervious to truth and honesty. All we can do is stand by and mourn when someone is that dead inside but doesn't know enough to lay down and finish the process.

Yes, I was told the same thing before going on air to debate Ann Coulter (ran her off the air). I respectfully disagree with ya, Savanster. When we shut up, roll over, and hope they go away, they will have won. See the last six years as additional evidence to that.

Oh, no.. Brad.. I'm not advocating shutting up.. I'm just not sure you can actually "run him off the air" like that twit Ann (totally different situation here). Plus, radio is a bit different than TV.. Granted, that might mean he's more willing to try and not look like a total ass by, say, cutting your feed.. but I seriously doubt he'll give you a fair run.

The reason I bring any of it up is because of the interview he had with that girl last week, was it? She tried pointing out some facts, and O'Liely simply said "you're a lunatic.. if you weren't, most people in this country would agree with you, but they don't".. yet, most people DO agree with her. There was nothing she can say or do at that point to reach his viewers. O'Liely shut down the conversation by calling her names, then talking over her and going to a comercial. He'll do the same thing to you, I'd guess.

I don't advocate being quiet about this (or anything these criminals are doing) at all. I also don't advocate kicking dead horses, that's all. I don't think you'd make any headway on his show.. Though, I suppose, if only one person sees you on there and can actually hear you.. then some good would have come of it.. I'm just saying, don't hope to make the slightest impact on -him-.

But, I'd say.. once he's done crapping on you, do as one commenter over at Raw suggested in the thread about that other interview.. Mention Olberman as a parting shot

You know, it's fascinating to see Darleen's insistence that Boxer's statements have something to do with "having a uterus", and not the cost that is borne by military families.

How is it that the Darleens of the world see and hear words and meanings that aren't there? Boxer said "immediate family", but Darleen heard "uterus". Does Darleen believe she's psychic, and can hear Boxer's inner thoughts, and thus knew what Boxer meant?

Or is it simply that Darleen's definition of "immediate family" refers ONLY to children? Most of us would say it includes fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters.

It's fascinating that the Darleens are more concerned for Rice's hurt feelings over something they wish Boxer had said, rather than the actual human lives that are at stake.

She's got a cannon ball for a head,.. and solid block of hardened cement for brains. She's part of the 26% of bu$$h SHEEPeOpLe who frantically wave a cheap plastic American flag made in China and professes to be an American patriot of the highest order. While her hero George Walker Bu$$h shits on the US Constitution and urinates on the Bill of Rights and has the audacity to tell us he has no choice because the Islamo-Fascists hate our freedom and way of life. As we advance deeper and deeper in to a Fascist State these mindless Nazi supporters will stand by and defend this demented dictator of an insane despot until the last vestige of DEMOCRACY has been DECIMATED and DESTROYED.

Does any conservative ever use facts to justify their comments? I really would like to meet an honest conservative. What I see all around and read are mean spirited, selfish people who are scared witless. People who are hoping the schoolyard bully will save them.

Here's a little reading material just to get you going that you will find much less cynical, hateful, and far more sane.

snip:

Does this maniacal war-monger really think that by sending 20,000 more troops we'll be getting any closer to achieving our long-range goals in that country (whatever the hell those goals are)? That we'll secure Baghdad? That we'll regain control of the Sunni Triangle and send a strong message to Muqtada Al Sadr's al Mahdi army and other Shiite militia that Democracy will prevail? Of course not. Just like every other time the U.S. intensified its military efforts. This is a country that mocks the U.S. A country led by a defiant Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who's made it clear he's running the country, not Bush. A country that punished it's former torturous dictator by hastily hanging him and taunting him. They've clearly come a long way, huh? Un-Curious George should be proud of the thriving Democracy he's created.

If/when you finish up with that come on back and we will share some more recommended reading for you. It may help you to get your head screwed on straight, and extricate your head from bu$s$h'$ back side. This type of reading material may help you not to continue to worship your failed murderous heroes such as bu$$h/cheney/rove - who try to pass themselves off as kind, caring, and compassionate human beings.

After heading to her site (hosted by Hosting Matters in Florida, she lives in Southern Cali, street address is 8971 somethingorotherstreet.. I could find out, but why bother.. I mean, "light snow" the other day, easy enough to google out some local cali news about it.. run that addy through a few mapquest searches in cali, etc), I noticed a few things.

First, for a hard-core reich-wing broad living in an affluent neighborhood in a very nice house, it seems odd to me that she's begging for money to send her kid to college (go look at the bottom of her page, she has a link to PayPal asking for donations). I wonder if she's claiming that income on her taxes..

Then we have stuff like this (from 2004).. "And how did John Kerry George Bush respond last night, mere minutes after GW had left the stage in NYC behave in general? Like the petulant, spoiled, self-aggrandizing stereotypical trustfund brat he is underneath the "I served in hid from Vietnam, so shutup" wrap of insufferable conceit. I couldn't watch all of it, it was so petty, rambling unto near incoherence, bizzarrely unconnected to the GW's actual speech reality. If anyone could watch that self-indulgent twaddle and still seriously consider voting for Kerry GW, then I question that person's basic rationality." (I've adjusted some of that..)...

From that same day's entry, we have this gem.. "The Islamofascist terrorists deserve no more than being hanged from the nearest lamppost while crows peck out their eyes.".. Just being 'human' and being outraged about a travesty (if a bit hate-filled), but then there's the typical reich-wing false connection, and it's the underpinning issue with these people.. this twat condemed -all- Muslims with this statement "Islamists (note the absense of 'terrorists' here) are evil wrapped in human skin and walking upright. They shot fleeing children in the back. They clubbed children to death with rifle butts." ... And THAT is where these deluded psychos come from. They can't see that some extremists don't speak for the whole. If they want to state that "all Islamists are bad because of the extremists", then I have to say "all Chrisitians are bad because of the murderers who kill doctors in the name of their god, and because of the Crusades and the Inquisition". Her OWN words on her OWN blog shows she's ignorant and a hate monger. She's no better than the terrorists because she supports genocide and murdering an entire people because of the actions of the few. Darleen is just like the "average person" in Iraq today that supports the killing of our troops to get them out. Darleen is a bird of a feather with those she thinks it's ok to kill. I lothe to think of how Darleen would have behaved during the Witch Trials where innocent women were tied and drown or burned alive because someone said "witch! witch! GOD says to KILL THEM!!". I wonder what she would have said and done if some psycho Christian tripping on bad bread called HER a witch.

And, so, here we are. Some rich white chick refusing to take words at their meaning and feeling a need to twist reality to suit her own ignorant hate-filled ends. Someone that can't see truth for what it is, and has to use lies and distortions to have her way. And the nerve to suggest to Brad to remove the item that shows just how pathetic and ignorant she is.. that's the best part!

As an interesting side note, I've not met a reich-winger yet that can manage to have a reasonable discussion about -anything-. They try to lie and distract and distort -everything-.. almost like they have something broken in their brains.

Brad - I came by to thank you for the link. I take it as a great honor to be called a 'wingnut outlet'. I believe that's the first time I've been called that. I think I'll make myself a badge and put it in my sidebar.

From what I've read of the comments here, there isn't a seconds tolerance of differing opinions. The name calling and hateful slurs are astounding. So I am quite sure I won't be accepted either, regardless of what I say or do.

I will say that I DO have a son serving in Iraq. He is neither ignorant, naive, poverty stricken or uneducated. He was raised to have a sense of duty and selflessness in contributing to our community and country. As was my other child.

We have a volunteer military and the majority of those serving have education and opportunity. They choose to serve. My son chose to serve and I support his choices.

As per Ms. Boxer's definition, that would give me the moral authority to have an opinion about the war.

The reality is that many of our past presidents and other leaders have had to make difficult decisions when they did not have children of their own who would have to carry out the hard work of those decisions.

Fortunately, we still produce young men and women with a sense of duty and honor who understand that service to the country is necessary and honorable.

I hope you all find some peace in your lives and can let go of the anger you exhibit in these comments.

I live in So. Cal and I post under my own legal name. I see you engaging in a little ad homenim from the safety of anonymity so you can slip into your soft, comfortable Godwin Law screeds.

REAL courage there.

Oh my god...and someone can use teh internets to find out who hosts my site!! I guess I should be a-skeered of it all.

And the laughable stuff is that some of you leftbots can do little more than criticize the landscaping of the house I live in.

Jaysus on a Pony, even 7th graders would snicker at such pettiness.

Savan is so uneducated to world events s/he thinks that "Islamist" is the same as "Muslim".

But hey, why should Savan let facts get in the way of a diarrehtic ranting? Purge baby purge!

Boxer got caught, just as Kerry did when not all the audience at Pasadena college were amused by his "joke" or were others with Chuckie's "only people who don't have any other choice join the military" shtick.

This is so reminiscent of people who can do nothing but bad mouth police officers.... but still expect to be protected by them when they dial 911.

What many of the left cult refuse to understand (and so clearly demonstrated on this thread) is that the US military is better educated than the public at large and comes in from the upper-middle, upper classes in a larger percentage than the "poor."

Why? Because so many of them are/were raised in homes where 'giving back' to the community is an inculcated value.

I've talked to them...not the least of which is the young man in Pensacola I referred to before --- his father is a United Airlines pilot who many times flew the Boston to LAX run that was flight 93's. Only through scheduling rotation was his dad not 93 on 9/11/01. His father had also been a Navy pilot. So he decided that he would follow in his own father's footsteps.

It is a sad, valueless, thin intellectual gruel you leftbots are attempting to thrive on.

Valueless, Darleen? Human life, the Constitution, honesty of discourse, responsibility of citizenship. We could talk of these in detail, but I don't think you want to. It might uncover the poverty of your one-note, follow-the-leader cartoon spiel.

We could start with Sen. Boxer's remarks, but it would only work if we discussed details --- what she really said. You see, it wouldn't be honest otherwise.

We could use what you said Ms. Rice should have replied to Sen. Boxer, to whit, "Sister, not only will every American have something to pay if Islamists do as promised and start bringing their bombers here because you and the rest of the cut-n-runners want to surrender in Iraq, but you have some brass ovaries in suggesting that I'm somehow less authentic to speak on this issue because I haven't bred to your specifications. Real feminist solidarity there, bitch. And if you want to play the 'blood tie' card, let's talk about your grandfather paying for the boats that hauled my grandfather to the new world in chains, eh?".

Should we analyze it in detail, point-by-point? Shall we determine how rational it is? We will be making no progress if we just spit out the first thing that comes to our prejudiced minds.

What do you say? Shall we discuss facts and details and the real elements of life and what is happening in the world rather than in certain little insular minds?

(Personally, I wish Condi had responded as you would have. She probably would have been taken out in a straight-jacket --- good for all of us. Oops, premature. We may get to that conclusion. And where's your sense of humor? I thought JofJ's remarks about the bushes were funny.)

Beth, you come in being polite and not spewing ignorance and hate, I see no reason for anyone to not be civil to you.

That said, I will point out a few things from your post. I hope you will endulge me and have a dialog in earnest.

"We have a volunteer military and the majority of those serving have education and opportunity." (emphasis added)

I was in the Navy for 3 years. Let me tell you, you are very mistaken. -Most- of the people I served with got in to the military right out of High School. That's not "education", not even in 1987 when I went in. Opportunity? as in what? I'd venture that almost 10% of the people I met while I was in were there in lue of going to jail. Most of the people I talked with didn't like the idea of not having health care at the jobs their friends were headed to, or their parents worked at. I understand you think our "volunteer military" is "mostly" made up of "smart kids who chose to serve instead of having good paying jobs", but that's not my expierence, and I'd guess that if you did a survey, you'd find that at least 80% of our enlisted personnel were from lower middle class on down, and didn't have any college at all.

When it comes to Officers, you are correct. They are mostly educated (you need a college degree), but a significant portion of them did it to get their education, and are looking to get out once their contract is up. I met a LOT of people that did the ROTC route for a free degree. Most of them had no interest in war, and most of them would not have done it had they known they were going to war. Again, in my expierence. We've seen a number of folks talking about "I had a great job, college degree.. I joined up to protect America!".. How many of them -still- think this is about protection? We're not in Iraq to protect America, the facts bear that out. It was a lie from the beginning, and many decent people didn't see that (and still don't because the MSM keeps trying to obfuscate the truth).

"From what I've read of the comments here, there isn't a seconds tolerance of differing opinions. The name calling and hateful slurs are astounding. So I am quite sure I won't be accepted either, regardless of what I say or do."

I'd point out that you are making rash assumptions here. We tolerate differing opinions just fine, what we don't tolerate are people trying to distract or lie. When someone says something out of line, we let them know it. It's been my expierence that, unless someone starts with aggression, we tend to try to correct them (factually) politely. If it's a strict matter of opinion, then there's nothing to say or do about it. I've seen a lot of differing opinions here, and no one gets jumped for that. But, when someone comes in suggesting Brad should pull posts because they don't like it, or when they show a misinformed basis for their opinions, we'll happily try to straighten them out (that's when things get nasty, you see.. most people have no stomach for being told their position is based on lies... it means that if they accept the truth, they have to change their positon, and most people are too prideful to do that without a fight).

"As per Ms. Boxer's definition, that would give me the moral authority to have an opinion about the war."

This is an example of taking things out of context.. Boxer never said -anything- about who has moral authority to "have an opinion about the war". She was asking about the body count to be expected. Rice claimed "no one could know that", yet projected body counts are -standard- discussion during strategic planning sessions. For this Administration to have avoided considering those counts is worrisome (to me, anyway). Boxer was implying, if I watched it all correctly, that people will be dying, and the families will bear the cost, not politicians... therefore, it bears the respect of at least trying to figure out how many people will have to die for this "plan". Everyone is entitled to an opinion about the war, but those waging it have a bit more responsibility.. they should be trying to figure out the least deadly way to solve the problems, and they clearly are not.. Only the people who will lose family will bear the pain of those rash and unscrutinized plans.

"The reality is that many of our past presidents and other leaders have had to make difficult decisions when they did not have children of their own who would have to carry out the hard work of those decisions."

And none of those Presidents have been as cavalier about killing our troops, or have started wars. None of them have spent billions of dollars and killed thousands of troops on a conflict of choice, and act of unprovoked aggression. THIS president is the first in our history to do such a thing (not to be confused with all the illegal medling we've done in various countries which has been eroding our credibility as a world leader for decades). Your point is correct, but doesn't apply to this discussion (as I see it).

"Fortunately, we still produce young men and women with a sense of duty and honor who understand that service to the country is necessary and honorable."

True.. Too bad they are being squandered and killed in an illegaly started conflict that isn't of importance to America's security. Too bad they are dying for a pack of lies, and to keep the oil flowing and profits growing for the top 2% of our society.. too bad they are being used for personal gain instead of as a defense for this (once) great nation.

Darleen, obviously you are not aware of where most of the recruiting offices are held. Nor have you seen the 60 minute reports of recruiters delibertly going to the poorer neighborhoods to recruit. Nor the answers from the Young Republicans when asked if they were joining the military they espoused so easily.

Beth, try visiting the VA hospital in your area and talking with the wounded as I have. You may learn more than just the rhetoric you are spouting. Not all volunteer military feel this trumped up war with Iraq was worth it.

Read the background surrounding 9/11 from a widow's quest for information, the commission Bush tried to quell for two years, then you might understand why so many are questioning the why America has destroyed two countries. The why we say No More American lives !

"What many of the left cult refuse to understand (and so clearly demonstrated on this thread) is that the US military is better educated than the public at large"

Yet, from this link we have that only 13% of the enlisted men/women have -any- college, with most of those only an Associates (a joke of a degree by most measures). However, the national rate for a Bachelors is 30% or so (from here).. I don't get how you figure a 13% military rate of a small segment of the population is "more" than 30% of a much larger population.

Don't let those facts bother you, though.

"and comes in from the upper-middle, upper classes in a larger percentage than the "poor.""

and from here we have a graph (page 3) that shows that the 'biggest household income' that contributes is at the $35,000 range.. sorry, but that's not "upper middle" or "upper class".. In fact, 75% of the military comes from homes making $45,000/yr or less. So MOST of the military comes from "lower middle class and poorer"..

Again, don't let those facts bother you or influence your position in any way. Feel free to distract now, and turn the conversation away from those pesky facts that you don't want to deal with.. hmmmk?

and, back on topic, those "poor(ish)" families are the ones who will lose children, not the more affluent.. and, from our little graph, less than 0.5% are from $100,000 and up.. and in my accounting, that's "upper middle class and up".

As another side note to the military makeup.. The first link above also notes that Hispanic enlistment has doubled recently, and that of blacks has actually gone down. Guess who the largest rate of increase in poverty in the U.S. is? Is it, maybe, hispanics? Not to mention the illegals the Military is willing to make citizens if they enlist.. I guess those are the multi-millionare upper upper middle class illegals there, huh?

And the 21 - 24 age group is the largest chunk with 30%, and the 18 - 20 group is another 16%.. almost 1/2 of our enlisted folks are "kids" by most measures.

(and to be fair, for my previous post, this IS the Army we're talking about. I'd guess the Marines are about the same, and Navy.. but the Air Force has a higher educational level overall.. but then, fly boys aren't the guys running from house to house being blown up by IEDs either)

If the rightwing naysayers can't understand why the bloggers here are angry at the New York Times or media in general for completely ignoring the fact that not a single American has any reason to believe their votes are being counted on election day, maybe they should hang around on a new site before they start spouting about their patriotism and our lack of it.

You ladies DO know that your sons are fighting for an illegitimate president, don't you? You know that there is no longer a Bill of Rights, don't you?

Was that you, holding up your purple finger at the Republican convention in 2004?

Islamism is a neologism, denoting a political ideology that holds that Islam is not only a religion to be practiced by individuals, but a political system. Islamism holds that all Muslims should live in a state which is governed according to Sharia law.

Islamists are radical Muslims who not only reject the tenets of Western Civilization but are actively involved in, or support the concept of a world-wide caliphate. Hamas is an Islamist organization (read their convenant and study what the concept of "waqf" is). this fatwa is another piece you obviously haven't read

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies --- civilians and military --- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it ... We --- with Allah's help --- call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson.

Just as communism and fascism was the 20th Century ideologies the West had to defeat, so Islamism is the 21st Century challenge to the West.

Apparently you can't even bother to read your own material.. I wonder who needs to be educated here...

"The phenomenon includes moderate and relatively liberal groups as well as radicals" (from wiki on Islamism)

But you'd rather kill them all and let god sort it out, right?

Again from dictionary.com "2. the monotheistic religious system of Muslims founded in Arabia in the 7th century and based on the teachings of Muhammad as laid down in the Koran; "Islam is a complete way of life, not a Sunday religion"; "the term Muhammadanism is offensive to Muslims who believe that Allah, not Muhammad, founded their religion" [syn: Islam]"

See.. you ignorant slut, you're willing to sit here and say all Muslims (via your twist on the words and meaning of Islamism) should die because they're evil. You say it through an attempt at a sterile word (islamist), but you ignore the greater implications.

You'll also note that the fatwa declaration is to "all Muslims", but not all Muslims support that position (one that came from Osama bin Laden, according to FAS.. I have no idea who FAS is, or where they get their information or motivation).

Try this on for size.. "A member of any of various Christian churches that believes in the sole authority of the literal Bible, a salvation only through regeneration, or rebirth, and a spiritually transformed personal life.".. Evangelical. Note "literal" here, and the same applies to the fanatic Muslims (Islamist extremeists).. it's all about religion, stupid. We have Christians that believe the "word of the bible is law", and "that law needs to be applied to every person on earth".. Explain to me how that's -any- different than those you want to kill?

See, I stand on the moral high ground here.. I think that Christian litteralist and extremists are of the same cloth as the Muslim litteralists and extremists, I think they all need to die. When your religion says "they must convert or die!", you become a menace to the planet. The PROBLEM here is, YOU can't seem to understand that not every Muslim is fanatical or an extremist.

You want to play some bullshit word game of "islamist is not Muslim", which is patent bullshit. Just like "Chritistians kill abortion doctors" is bullshit, the TRUTH is being obfuscated.. "Fanatical Christisans kill abortion doctors" is much closer to the -truth-, just like "fanatical Islamists tend to be terrorist group members".. I say it that way because we have terrorists who aren't Muslim all over the world (including here in the good ole U.S. of A. including some Christians).

At the end of the day, you have no interest in honesty or truth.. which is why you're content to shit all over Boxer for -no good reason-. You're a partisan hack, and ignorant closed minded bitch (well, cunt if one takes cues from your blog entries). You want to keep things "simple", so you group an entire culture into a neat killable box. Sorry, life isn't that simple.

I want the terrorists to stop killing us too. I want them to leave us alone and stick to their own business. Guess why they won't? One reason is idiots like you.. you're no better than they are. You are content to send your military in to destroy their world just because they are different than you (the people in general, not the terrorists specifically.. see, when you start genocide, you -create- the terrorists.. see Iraq for an example) The second reason is because [of people like you] we keep invading their lands and stealing their resources. Countries like the U.S. figure it's ok to shit on their beliefs and tell them they need McDonalds and BlockBuster video stores renting movies they don't find appropriate.. We send missionaries in to their lands to try and tell them that their religion is wrong and ours is right and they are going to hell if they don't convert (such prostelizing is illegal in many of those nations). Hell, we had to send in OUR MILITARY to save some morons that got busted trying to convert Mulisms illegally (I forget the story, but I'm sure many here can point you to the link). Though, I'm sure you don't give a shit that we spent tax dollars saving some Christians from the death they deserved, all because of religion... you don't care that the same thing would NEVER happen for some wiccans or American Muslims in some other country.

I recon there's no longer a point in discussing things with you. As with all reich-wingers, you're content to pick and chose which facts you want to see, even when they are all sitting there together in a bucket. When someone points out your folley, you offer "proof" that counters your assertion (I've seen that alot from your ilk). It's like you can't see the words on the page or something.. or, worse, much like with this whole Boxer thing, you see things that aren't there at all. You make things up out of whole cloth a lot of times, and toss a few anectdotal phrases around to make it look like it's possible, yet, at the end of the day, it's total bushit.

Go ahead, show me some more sites that try to say "Islamism is different than Muslim".. Feel free to end up putting up some links to some way the hell out there reich-wing neo-con sites that are just as extreme as the terrorists you say we have to create then kill in Iraq.

And before you get too far off on that Fascism bent, you better read up on that and what it is.. then look at what your precious Shrubby and crew are doing here NOW.. Justifying the fascist take over is enabling fascists.. right? And the reich-wing seems to love to justify it's implimentation while decrying it's a bad thing. More double talk and nonsense from reich-wing..

So let's review so we know where I stand (don't want you misunderestimating me):

Terrorists - bad. Since they have a bent on killng in the name of their religion, we probably need to kill them. But how about we wait till we know who they are and not condem millions of innocent people to death because we're afraid of a menace we created.. hmmk?

Truth - good. If we don't have truth and honesty, we can never move forward as a nation or as a spieces. Liars are bad for progress, safty, knowledge, .. everything, reall, except their own personal advantage and gain.. Again, bad, because many many innocents must suffer for no good reason.

Oh.. and I noticed you had nothing to say about your totally screwed up facts about the military.. Bravo! counter one point and just ignore the pesky truth you can't rebutt. (again, Army stats which probably hit Marines as well.. Navy a little less, and probably don't match well to Air Force at all).

Oh.. and before I forget.. You bring up terrorists (and Islamism) to justify Iraq, yet even your Chimperor has said there was no connection between Spet. 11, 2001 and Iraq.. There was no connection between Saddam and Osama.. And there were no terrorists in Iraq before we invaded.

Tell me again why we're over there killing innocent civilians, Muslims, Islamists, who did NOTHING to us and were no threat to us? Tell me again why the U.S. refused to let the Democratically elected officals draft the Constitution they wanted to (which included socializing oil revenues, preventing non-Iraqi citizens from owning businesses, and establishing Islam as the prevailing law)? .. Oh.. right, cause we're not there to give the Iraqi people what they want, or let them be free to make their own choices.

"Some Islamist groups have been implicated in terrorism and have become targets in the War on Terrorism. However, given the instability caused by the invasion of Iraq in 2003, it seems that in order to bring that region under control again, there will be some sort of cooperation between the West and Islamist groups."

Or.. just kill them all, right Darleen? Of course, the implication from the preceeding paragraph is that not -all- Islamists are tied to terrorism, but with what we've done to those people, we need to work with groups Darleen thinks should be killed out right. Kind of what the Study group told Shrubby, who then decided to twist the words of and "attack" instead of "reach out to".

The more I read from that Wiki page, the more I see how wrong Darleen is. Thanks, Darleen, for not only showing your ass, but proving my points as well. Islam/Islamism/Islamists are just fundamentalists, like Christian fundamentalists. In fact, Islam is to Muslim what Evangelicals are to Christianity. There's nothing about "Islam" that requires the death of everyone else, that's the wackos saying that.. those are the guys we need to be after.. not the civilians in Iraq (which is who we're hurting the most with rapes and murders and helping one side in the Civil war, and all that radioactive depleted uranium we're burrying in their walls.. nice).

When right wingers run away from an argument, they act like they're winning because you don't get to make your point. When 90 corporations force Air America into financial ruin they think they are winning.

You can't kill an idea by defunding it, because a great idea, like the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights don't need your damn money to survive. Just a pad and pencil will do.

By the way, "Ring of Fire" is still a superb program and you can get it as a podcast for free through iTunes! I've been so busy I forgot all about it and downloaded all of the episodes since the election. Great, Great show!

To the bush Ladies ..six in 10 Iraqis say they approve of attacks on U.S.-led forces ... so why is bush not listening to the Iraqis he so wants to bring freedom to.
On Meet The Press good old Senator DeSwine (R)replied to Russet's question, "if they want us out, and they’re in favor of attacking us, why are we still there?
SEN. DeWINE: Tim, I was shocked by that as well. But you know, on reflection, this is their country. There’s a lot of things going wrong. You blame someone who is there. Still does not change that we’re not in Iraq primarily for the Iraqis. We’re in Iraq for us. We’re—have to do what we have to do, and it goes back to what the three generals—three military leaders said. It would be a total disaster for us to leave. It is in our self-interest, the interest to protect American families, that we are in Iraq. That’s why we’re there."http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15046615/page/5
That's what the "kids" are fighting for...US- Bush- self interest.

To return the original topic that prompted Darleen and Beth to show up and drop turds in the middle of this thread (inexplicably expecting to be greeted with flowers and chocolates), apparently prompted by their inability to distinguish between delusional wishful thinking/psychic ability to "hear" what Boxer "meant" rather than what Boxer actually said:

Yet even now, neoconservatives inside and outside of government are counseling Bush to remain in Iraq for years to prevent the Shiite-dominated regime from collapsing. They also are encouraging him to prepare for battle with Iran and Syria if those countries start meddling in Iraq --- as if they aren't now. With what exactly and for how long we are supposed to do battle with Tehran and Damascus, the militaristic neocon noncombatants in Washington don't say.But then again, they have a tolerance for risk and cost that exceeds that of those who actually do the fighting and dying.

(Emphasis mine. Read the full column, it is worth it)

Lookee there, Darleen & Beth! Do you understand what Boxer actually said now?

Oh wait, this columnist doesn't have a uterus, and doesn't have an IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER serving in the War, yet he is making the same point as Boxer! Would you like to attack him now and call him a c*nt?

Or are you now willing to consider the idea that maybe, just maybe, Boxer was trying to save your family members from the danger of being used as fodder in the Meat Grinder of Permanent War?

Let me be clear: I deeply respect those Americans who have chosen to serve their country in the military. They have chosen one of the most difficult, most thankless jobs in the world, at risk to their own lives, and they honor the contract they signed even as many of them question the wisdom of this War they fight on the orders of Rich Old Men in Washington.

Our soldiers honor their end of contract, and WE must honor ours: to never place them in harm's way without making certain it is for a JUST CAUSE, WORTHY of their sacrifice, to never send them into battle without the best armor and supplies in existence, to take good care of them if they are killed or injured or disabled, to take good care of their families so they needn't worry, to not leave them in harm's way for one nano-second longer than absolutely necessary... is the only way to honor their sacrifice, however impossible it may be to repay a soldier for the burden each has shouldered on our behalf.

...to give them our best, as they are giving us their best.

That has NOT been done in Bush's War. Bush and his Rich Old Men of Washington Club have not honored our end of the contract with our soldiers, and that is unacceptable to those of us who are against this war.

For anyone to attack Boxer for something she DID NOT SAY, yet IGNORE the ominous rumblings of Perma-War that threaten us all, is inexplicably obtuse and dangerous.

WASHINGTON — President Bush is giving his national security adviser, Condyloma Rice, the authority to manage postwar Iraq and the rebuilding of Afghanistan.

While some saw it as a sign of frustration with the handling of postwar efforts, Bush and other officials said the move is a logical next step and reflected no dissatisfaction with progress.

"We want to cut through the red tape and make sure that we're getting the assistance there quickly so that they can carry out their priorities," Bush spokesman Scott McClellan said. "It's a new phase, a different phase we're entering."

Rice will head the Iraq Stabilization Group, which will have coordinating committees on counterterrorism, economic development, political affairs and media messages. Each committee will be headed by a Rice deputy and include representatives of the State, Defense and Treasury departments and the CIA. ...

The new structure will give Bush's top White House aides a stronger voice in decisions and will make the president more directly accountable. Because of their close relationship, many people will assume Bush signed off on Rice's decisions. .......

President Bush also weighed in on the reason for his decision.

Rice "is going to make sure that the efforts continue to be coordinated so that we continue to make progress," Bush said at a news conference with President Mwai Kibaki of Kenya. "And listen, we're making good progress in Iraq. Sometimes it's hard to tell it when you listen to the filter" of the news media.

"to never send them into battle without the best armor and supplies in existence,".. See, we're not "at war", like many love to tout.. "war on terrorism" they say, yet we never declared WAR.. See, if we HAD, then we'd have spun up the "war effort" like in all the OTHER WARS we've fought in. Then we'd have gotten adequate armor and weapons to our troops..

Instead, we're letting our men and women die without proper protection... because our leaders say "we can't get it made fast enough for them".. Hey.. fucksticks.. how about commendeering a few factories and outfitting them to build armor and the like? I mean, IT'S WAR!!!!!!!.. right? uh.. right? uh.. hello?

It was decided not to declare war because it would "cause strain on the economy" and "needlessly inconvienence citizens at home".. WOW.. what bullshit if I ever heard it. Just like Shrubby said, days after Sept. 11, 2001 happened.. "get out there and shop.. spend some money! don't let the terrorists win!". again, WOW.. holy bottom line bullshit, batman!

This entire illegal invasion has been one lie after another.. and those in charge, those sending people to die, have NO personal price to pay in all this. THAT was Boxer's point, and any of you reich-wing morons that can't understand that should go enlist now and jump on an IED to save some poor bastard that never thought we'd engage in an illegal war of aggression without just cause.

I also have to note, Beth hasn't poopied on anyone here yet, don't count her with Darleen.. I'll also note that Darleen has no children or husband fighting in Iraq either (not that I've seen stated, anyway).. she has 4 daughters (none of whom would likely be drafted if history is an indicator), and her grand sons are pretty small still (info from her site).. no worries for her, so it's easy for her to sit on her high horse like Shrubby (who's perfect aged kids aren't serving in the military) and send other people off to die for her bigotry and ignorance. Let's just hope that if/when the instate the draft, they'll include women in the marching orders, and let's also hope they try to make Darleen into someone not lying, and start with kids in that $100,000/yr household income bracket for their picks.. That'd put her kids right up front.. THEN watch her change her tune and sing about an illegal invasion that's been mismanaged since the outset, and a HUGE squandering of our resouces (and lives).

I don't believe for a minute that a lot of these gop's (Greedy Old Perverts) that post on blogs have kids in Iraq. I think this is another rovian tactic (Lie) of blowing smoke up the asses of the American people (and it tickles) for political gains.

My question to Darleen & Beth is it true that gop women and gay men touch themselves when they watch sean hannity . . .

JoJ.. Remember the painting on the side of the Mosque that read "My god is better than your god"? That -had- to be some GOPer's kid.. Only a holier than though, self indulgent, ignorant prick would write something like that.. You know, a reich-winger. So, at least ONE of these GOPers is telling the truth.. and with 0.5% of the army being "people from wealthy families", we know there are a few GOP kids there.

I don't tend to discount someone saying they have family there. My brother was there.. cracked a vertibrea in his neck in 2003 (before the "mission accomplished" speach). He still can't get that taken care of through the VA, all these years later. Now, if he was a GOP kid, he's have had his physician take care of it.. but.. we're not a wealthy family (in fact, when he and I joined up, our family was making under $20/yr for a family of 3).. /sarcasim We joined because we didn't want to take those cooshy high paying jobs.. we rather'd risk our lives for low pay and being someone elses puppet/slave for a few years, subjected to the chain of command and some sweaty old prick who felt entitled to abuse 'the new guys'. /sarcasim-off.

Condi rice can refer to the 21,500 troops putting their lives in danger as an "Augmentation"!!!!
And all the right wants to bloviate about is Boxer's coment about how she and Rice will not be as effected!! Absurd! Trivial!! Here we go again, the madison avenue style sell the war ( and a new one with Iran ), and blame the Democrats. This is the begining, they have the Corporate media machine to shove whatever twisted spin on events they want, real or imaginery.
At least we have the internet, and word of mouth.
I have a pen and pencil, so I draw progressive cartoons in an attempt to share the progressive side of political cartooning that has very few outlets.
(the right side has many) Check out my Condi, Augmetation cartoon at my website...